Re: Seeking 8x10 scanner advice

From: Martin Angerman ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 09/27/04-04:31:32 PM Z
Message-id: <004d01c4a4e1$c4c72980$>

The topic seems to have shifted, so Ill jump in.

I read digital image capture to be similar to digital recording at the end
of the LP ear...a work in progress. The technology continues to evolve at a
rapid pace, and will be much better in 5 years. Kind of like comparing late
analog recording with early digital recording, and fast-forwarding to
current digital recording. End of cycle analog (audio or photo) has an
advantage over early digital. All you have to do is look back at the
earlier digital shots. I'll switch to digital when I can get a Graflok back
with enough quality for B&W capture, that is affordable for the advanced
hobbyist. Until then, I'll stick with film.

I can see the future in digital negatives, and hand-coated printing. Until
then, I think that film capture is the way to go. Perspective control, etc.
is not there with digital yet. There are artifacts that are inherent in the
technology. Also,film negatives can be rescanned in the future, so one can
have the detail and subtlety, and be future-proofed.

For what it's worth.

Martin Angerman

----- Original Message -----
From: "Schuyler Grace" <>
To: <>
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 2:53 PM
Subject: RE: Seeking 8x10 scanner advice

> Judy (and the rest of the digital-only folks out there),
> I, for one, am very happy that you are happy with your choice of
> and I wouldn't try to change your mind for anything in the world. That
> said, I just love my 8x10 and 4x5 cameras, and I couldn't imagine having
> give them up (and I would give nearly anything to get my hands on an old
> 8x20 or 7x17). Sure, the 8x10 is heavy, especially with lenses, film
> holders, and a tripod, but there is just something about seeing an image
> come to life, full-size, in the ground glass. There's the element of
> surprise, when you don't know exactly what you have gotten until it's
> printed. There are the constraints of having to frame and focus and
> and everything else to capture the image you want the first time. There
> the disappointments of watching the light go while you fumble with one
> film holder to make sure you got the shot or discovering an ugly billboard
> right in the middle of a scenic landscape you just hiked all over hell and
> creation to shoot. And there's the can't-wait-to-see-it excitement as you
> progress through each step of the process.
> Now, I don't begrudge anyone a single binary digit for using digital
> components in their work. If it works for you, then have at it! But as
> wonderful as digital is for you, it's (currently) just a format for
> snapshots for me. For other folks, it's a means to making large negatives
> or fixing problems with an analog image, and for still others, it is the
> work of the Devil, Him/Herself.
> Here's to diversity!
> -Schuyler
Received on Mon Sep 27 16:36:52 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 10/01/04-09:17:56 AM Z CST